| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Reducing the WAL overhead of freezing in VACUUM by deduplicating per-tuple freeze plans |
| Date: | 2022-09-22 04:22:48 |
| Message-ID: | 20220922042248.GC464247@nathanxps13 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 02:11:36PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 1:14 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Presumably a
>> generic WAL record compression mechanism could be reused for other large
>> records, too. That could be much easier than devising a deduplication
>> strategy for every record type.
>
> It's quite possible that that's a good idea, but that should probably
> work as an additive thing. That's something that I think of as a
> "clever technique", whereas I'm focussed on just not being naive in
> how we represent this one specific WAL record type.
Got it. I think that's a fair point.
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2022-09-22 04:34:04 | Re: pg_basebackup's --gzip switch misbehaves |
| Previous Message | Nathan Bossart | 2022-09-22 04:21:04 | Re: Reducing the WAL overhead of freezing in VACUUM by deduplicating per-tuple freeze plans |